on the news just now

I hope the prosecutors rot in hell personally.

Steve

On or around Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:19:45 +0100, Steve Taylor enlightened us thusly:

I've sent a thing to the have your say lot.

hopefully, it'll get added to the beeb news.

I've just heard this on the news too.

I'm not sure how it helps anything.

"Austin Shackles" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com...

Thats one of those articles that I suspected I knew what it would say before I clicked on the link. That's frigg'in awful. Never mind public frigg'in interest,What about the interests of the rest of the family for gods sake? It's a very very sad state of affiars.

Just awful. :-(

Amen to that!

No, there's something odd going on here.

It seems to have taken then something over eighteenth months to decide to charge him, that's not normal or usual.

It is possible that something new has come to light.

Surely it's more like 9 months. 9 months isn't an unusual length of time to get such things to come to court.

Yes, I read this today too on the BBC website. It seems harsh, but the prosecutor was saying something like, we know the guy has suffered through the loss of his family and we have carefully considered all the issues, and we still feel that there is a public interest in the prosecution going ahead. That suggests that there may be something going on that we are not aware of.

I, for one, will reserve judgement on whether the prosecution is a good idea until I have heard the case.

Irrespective of the fate of 'Gresh' wouldn't public interest be best served by fixing the dam road! And possibly persecuting those who have failed to do so in the past!

Yes indeed.

I agree. If the CPS didn't think they had a case they wouldn't bring one.

7 kids and 2 adults in a LWB. In theory legal (I think) but sideways facing seats? That grey area of the law that we have debated in the past... If "they" can get a prosecution through "they" can outlaw sideways seats. This is well within the "public interest" remit.

Same here but unfortunately with our media, unless you go and sit in the public gallery you won't get. You'll only get the "story" not the truth or facts.

Was the road at fault? Like having a hole in it or an unmarked collasped verge? Like others ISTR some references to another vechicle and a bend. It is ones own care and duty to always drive within the limitations of the vehicle, road and conditions.

Should those that get hurt in a multiple pile up on a motorway in fog be able to prosecute the designers of the motorway? Because that is what you are saying.

Certainly if the motorway is defective and/or dangerous!

Regretably all too often mdifications to dangerous roads are not initiated untill a few are killed, since by bean counter statistics they are not dangerous untill then!

You can't modify each and every raod that may be perceived as "dangerous". It's every drivers responsibility to drive within the limits of themselves, their vehicle and the road that they're on.

On or around Mon, 21 Jul 2008 21:29:03 +0100 (BST), "Dave Liquorice" enlightened us thusly:

legal if they're your family, which they were in this case.

There's also the point that "proper" child restraints, when the motor goes under water, are a damn' sight more likely to get your kids drowned. How many small kids, or even adults, can remember how to unfasten it quickly in those circumstances, especially if it landed on it's side?

Also, you're likely to get air pockets in the top of the thing. If you're strapped in further down, that's no help to you.

not everything is as black and white as people wish...